About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 8
CNN 4
CNNW 4
CSPAN2 3
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
services and a surge of combat vets from the iraq and afghanistan wars entering the system, the demand for v.a. health care services has increased dramatically in recent years. this bill provides $58.6 billion for v.a. discretionary funding, $2.3 billion over current funding. the bill also includes $52.5 billion in fy 2013 advanced appropriations for vets' medical care. one of the very few areas in which this bill provides an increase in funding is v.a. medical research, which is $72 million over the budget request to restore funding to the current level. with little room to maneuver on the v.a. side of the ledger, the vast majority of the savings in the bill comes from incrementing or defunding certain military construction projects. the bill provides $13.7 billion for military construction, $1 billion below the request. the milcon reductions in the bill are restricted to the active-duty components. the guard and reserve components, family housing, barrack and other accounts are fully funded at the president's request. every military construction project funded in this bill is authori
savings on the mandatory side and savings from winding down the war in iraq and afghanistan. these are savings that cbo scores of about a trillion dollars, that cbo scoring them at a trillion dollars. now we know some republicans will quibble over the savings but they have no leg to stand on. though war is the second-biggest policy driver of the deficit after the bush tax cuts. if conducting the war ads to the debt, it is undeniable winding down the war deliver savings. the administration tells us with the wind down their putting in place in the iraq and afghanistan, they can prosecute the war on about $630 billion over the next decade. cbo, however, assumes 1.67 trillion in war funding for 2021. by adopting the administration's lower number, we can save over a trillion. we know the republicans agree with this because they included the exact same savings in the wrong and budget that passed the house. i never criticized such accounting then and it's hard to see how they could do so now. last, senator reid's proposal allows a joint committee that has the potential to achieve e
misspent in iraq and afghanistan over a 10-year period. the "wall street journal" reporting they include $300 million for u.s. agency, agricultural development project with a "burn rate" of million dollars a day that paid afghan farmers to work in their own field, it covers subcontractors in eastern afghanistan, paying 20% of the contract to insurgents for protection and touches on cases where host government was unable to sustain a project like costly water treatment plant in iraq that produced murky water and lacked power and construction of afghan military economy that would cost $40 million to operate and maintain, far beyond what the afghan government could afford. 75% of the total contract dollars spent to support operations in iraq and afghanistan have gone to just 23 major contractors. the federal work force assigned to oversee the contracts hasn't grown in parallel with the massive growth of wartime expenditures. read more about that in the "wall street journal" this morning. one more tweet, if i can, just to finish off the discussion. adding this from darrell price, saying: an
're at war for 10 years, in afghanistan and iraq at surge levels. we assume we're going to be fighting this war for 10 more years, with over 100,000 troops in afghanistan and oh, gosh, wait, we're going to withdraw our troops in 2014. $1 trillion in savings. i've got a better idea. let's pass a bill to cover the moon with yogurt that will cost $5 trillion today. and then let's pass a bill the next day to cancel that bill. we could save $5 trillion. wait, i've got a better idea. our debt is $14 trillion. let's come up with a new plan to spend $14 trillion, then rescind it the next day and let's save $14 trillion. this stuff is fiscal fantasy. you can't make this stuff up, mr. speaker. suggesting that we're going to be in a war at these levels for 10 more years when everybody knows we've already decided not to do that, that does not get us $1.3 trillion in spending cuts. only in washington can you add up math like that. we need real spending cuts. i yield myself an additional minute to say, this is getting serious, mr. speaker. very serious. we can't keep spending money we just don't hav
of pride it is as we go across afghanistan and iraq to visit those young guardsmen. truly, they are magnificent in how they serve, what they do. let me tell you, it is good to be in the mile high city. always good to get up on the high ground so you can survey what is going on around you. particularly when you are headed into a conflict. [laughter] conservatives already hold the high ground of ideas, but this conference provides a vantage point with a view of the challenges that lay ahead for us as we go forward in this country. you know, over the next 17 months, i believe america will undergo some tough times as we begin the process of crawling and domesticating a beast known as the federal government. [applause] my concern is not only that washington has intruded upon the rights of the state's and individuals to make decisions about our own health care, our small businesses, our money, but that it is also advocating one of its most -- advocating one of its most basic duties, which is defending our borders. [applause] i always thought that government was supposed to do th
of the american people. >> mr. speaker, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is in afghanistan and was asked by a number of soldiers whether they were going to get their checks next week. how can you allow them to wonder whether they are going to get paid? >> we will be able to come to an agreement. >> if we could have had this with a bipartisan agreement? >> it could have been finished early this past week. there was a bipartisan agreement between myself and the leaders to move the underlying bill through the house yesterday. all the president had to do was say yes and it would have moved quickly through both the house and the senate. we wasted a week that we did not need to waste. now we have been driven into this and the president has to decide how we will get out of it. >> what gives you confidence? >> in spite of our differences, we are dealing with a reasonable and as possible people that want this crisis to end as quickly as possible. >> let me add, the country is not going to default for the first time in history. that is not going to happen. we have a level of seriousness with the
? >> yeah from this standpoint, safelying we projected we would in the iraq and afghanistan war when we know we are going to be out of there. it is dishonest to say you are going to have savings from something that isn't spent any way. >> greta: what would he said? >> he would probably say the republicans -- the budget never becomes law. if reid's bill would pass it would become law. a budget is nothing than an outline. >> greta: you are saying you did it so we do it? >> probably his argument. >> greta: what do you think the american people would think of that? >> american people are fed up with the partisanship in washington. they want us to reach an agreement. a large share of the calls we've gotten since the president's speech monday night is, just get it done. >> greta: there are a couple of factions. within the republican party in the house, you have the tea party people who say there must be a balanced budget amendment in this bill or we are voting no. that's divided. over here the senate says if the boehner bill comes here it is not likely to pass if it does the president says he's go
or daughter, husband or wife is in iraq or afghanistan, might cost them their check if we get three or four or of six days past august 2nd. >> i heard you say earlier we're seeing a generational divide in the house right now, the results of a generational divide. >> no question in the republican party there's a huge generational divide. as gloria just noted, a lot of these 87 freshmen, they're not career politicians. they were car dealers, maybe they were prosecutors. some of them were farmers. they don't feel bebeholden to the speaker. they think the people telling them to compromise are the people who built the pile of debt, the miss we're in right now. they don't truss them. remember a lot of people are making fun of them. a lot of people say these crazy tea party party. why won't they compromise? they won the last election. the last time america spoke they sent these people to washington. so they think that's what they were sent here to do. now, maybe the public's changed its mind. maybe the president and democrats have convinced them otherwise. but they just in november won an election
savings account for scaling back the wars in afghanistan and iraq. let's talk now to a new member of the senate who opposes both of these plans. he says they don't do enough to bring fiscal sanity to washington, senator rand paul, republican of kentucky, is with us this evening. senator paul, the conservatives in the house can't round up the votes to pass their plan. speaker reid probably has 52 or 53 for his, but he doesn't have the 60 votes he would need to get it through the senate. we're days away from a potential default. would you prefer default to either of these two plans. >> no. but the interesting thing is the conservatives did round up the votes. the conservatives in the senate and the house. we got 234 votes in the house last week for cut, cap and balance to balance the budget and to raise the debt ceiling the full $2 trillion, exactly what the president wants. it's interesting the dynamic here because some are saying we're unwilling to compromise. we already offered the president $2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling. all we want in exchange is a balanced budget am
is in afghanistan. he was asked by soldiers whether they will get their checks next week. how can you allow these soldiers to wonder whether they will be paid? >> the senator and i are both confident that we are going to be able to come to some agreement with the white house and and this impasse -- and end this impasse. >> [inaudible] with a bipartisan agreement next door? >> we could have had this finished early this week. there is a bipartisan agreement between myself and the senate leaders to move the underlying bill that we moved to the house yesterday. all the president had to do was say yes. that bill would have moved quickly through the house and senate. we have wasted a week that we did not need to waste. we have been driven into this cul-de-sac and it is time for the president to decide how we are going to get out of it. >> what gives you confidence? >> in spite of our differences, we are dealing with reasonable, responsible people who want to this crisis to end as quickly as possible. i am confident we will. >> let me just add, you know, our country is not going to default for the
is in afghanistan. he was asked whether they are going to get their checks next week. >> i think we are beth confident we'll be able to come to some agreement with the white house in this impasse. heading the way of the vote. by this time, we could have had this bipartisan agreement nextdoor. we could have had this bill flippished early between next week. there was an agreement between myself and leaders to be moved through the house. for the president, all he had to do was say yes. that bill would have moved quickly through the house and senate. we wasted a week we didn't need to waste. we've driven through the cul-de-sac and it is time for the president to decide howle handle it. >> what gives you confidence? >> in spite of our differences, we are dealing with reasonable and responsibly people that want this crisis to end as quickly as possible. i'm confident it will. let me add, our country is not going to default for the first time in history, that is not going to happen we now have a level of seriousness with the right people at the table that we needed and thought we had last weekend.
? well, they say that the savings from winding down the wars in iraq and afghanistan don't count. specifically, they say that these savings are -- quote -- "a widely ridiculed accounting gimmick that breeds cynicism." unquote. yet all but three of the 43 senators who signed this letter voted for the ryan budget on may 25 this year. that budget counted the same drawdowns as almost identical in savings. so those savings were legitimate enough to secure their support for the ryan budget but not legitimate enough to secure their support for leader reid's debt ceiling compromise. and here we are on the precipice, and suddenly they've done a 180-degree turn. either these savings count or they don't. you can't have it both ways. so we are proposing exactly what republicans have been saying that they want. yet instead of accepting this deal, they're using what precious time we have left to push forward with their agenda, and it's not even their agenda. it's the tea party agenda. their radical agenda is a wolf in sheep's clothing. last night we voted down speaker boehner's plan which requ
to afghanistan, and that would turn a corner. >> or something with a base in their district. that does not work with this tea party caucus. that according to jeff blake, republican, was saying last night. that is refreshing in a lot of regards. this is the reform that a lot of people want. but the question is, has it gone too far. does it go beyond the limits of what is reasonable and what is gettable. and are they going to, you know, give up the goods trying to get the perfect here because they do have the offer of cuts, the trillion -- up to a trillion dollars in the boehner bill and more that they gave up in the earlier compromise that was rejected last week. and, you know, they could have gotten up to $4 trillion. now it will be a lot less. they could get $4 trillion just by giving up the bush tax cuts. there are a lot of options here, but they're not willing to concede -- that group is not willing to concede any kind of revenue changes and that has been one of the sticking points. the other sticking point is they just want more from the spending side than even conservatives think is possib
savings based on savings on troop levels in iraq and afghanistan. >> well, interesting enough while they're calling the overseas contingency operation dollars phantom funds, anderson, you may know they used those funds and put them in their own budget that they've already voted for and relied on. >> so where do you see this going? what do you think happens tonight? what do you think happens tomorrow? >> well, of course, i don't know what's going to happen tonight. obviously the republicans are meeting with themselves to see whether or not they have the votes to pass what john boehner has offered as a purely partisan alternative. we were not involved in those discussions. we were not involved in the decisions. and it's interesting that even in their own party it is deeply factionalized, deeply divided paint, divided against their leadership, angry at their leadership, and a party that is divided itself has difficulty working with the president or working with us. and that's unfortunate. and the country is the poorer for it. and the image of america is poorer for it. and i would hope that
proposal. why? well, they say that the savings from winding down the wars in iraq and afghanistan don't count. specifically, they say that these savings are -- quote -- "a widely ridiculed accounting gimmick that breeds cynicism." unquote. yet all but three of the 43 senators who signed this letter voted for the ryan budget on may 25 this year. that budget counted the same drawdowns as almost identical in savings. so those savings were legitimate enough to secure their support for the ryan budget but not legitimate enough to secure their support for leader reid's debt ceiling compromise. and here we are on the precipice, and suddenly they've done a 180-degree turn. either these savings count or they don't. you can't have it both ways. so we are proposing exactly what republicans have been saying that they want. yet instead of accepting this deal, they're using what precious time we have left to push forward with their agenda, and it's not even their agenda. it's the tea party agenda. their radical agenda is a wolf in sheep's clothing. last night we voted down speaker boehner's plan wh
but was budgeted on the iraq and afghanistan wars and a number of things conservatives will say don't add up to significant real spending cuts. the concern for conservatives is as this bill moves forward other things will be tacked onto it once the house has to vote on it and they do a final conference on this bill, it's possible you could see things snuck in there that would lead to revenue increases as well. lots of speculation about what this bill would look like says time has run out. it's time for everybody to stand and vote for his bill. we'll see where this goes from here. this is a big development in many sways that was push by what we saw last night. and it brought us to this stage of the game. let's listen to that sound bite we had from harry reid, then we'll talk more about this. >> the republican plan is not a solution. as experts say, all too soon we would be back in the midst of partisan rankling with our economy once again held prisoner by extremists in the republican party led by the tea party. martha: he's calling the pea tarty extremists. as you well know, he said several o
the savings would come from iraq and afghanistan and don't materialize and votes on a balanced budget amendment but what the democrats reviews to do is tie an increase in the debt ceiling to passing the balanced budget amendment. you can see the rough outlines of a deal. any deal would have to go back to the house. would these conservatives especially tea party members that speaker boehner had to make concessions to, what would they do if it comes back monday night just hours before the deadline, would they vote for that? >> 201 votes in favor of this legislation. right now 196. take a look. as of now 12 republicans have bolted from the leadership from john boehner, the speaker, and eric cantor the majority leader and right now 12 republicans have voted against and still not there. 216. there is still plenty of time left. nine minutes plus for this vote to conclude. it's a fascinating development as you say. by the way, we're told john boehner was mulling around and didn't seem overly concerned but it is still not a done deal yet. once this does pass, john, assuming it passes, gets 21
in less than one hour in afghanistan. less than one hour. so here we're talking about millions of jobs, supported by funding from the national endowment for the arts, $165 billion in economic activity. against all of the other things we do, where there is so little payback for what we spend of the taxpayers' money. but the two things i'd like to mention in addition to kind of the value added aspects of arts funded -- funding, if you think back over the history of mankind, what has survived of the great civilizations of this world? the only thing that has survived has been the creative product of the minds of men and women throughout history. literature. music. architecture. painting. sculpture. these are the only things that survived. if you look around this glorquouse room we have the privilege of serving in, the famous painting of george washington, lafayette, the architecture that's represented here. this is all the creative product of the men and women of generations. this is what our soul speaks to the world, to yen rations to come -- to generations to come and this is what we're
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)